The all-male court issued its revised opinion Friday in the case after taking the unusual step last month of withdrawing its December opinion, which had received nationwide publicity, debate and criticism.

Tyrone Biggums:APPLICANT: Well, I type about 90 words a minute. I'm completely well-versed in all IBM and Macintosh programs.

GEORGE: (looking over her resume) Well Miss Coggins you're ah, obviously qualified for the job. You've all the necessary skills and experience. But you're extremely attractive. you're gorgeous. I'm looking at you, I can't even remember my name. So ah, I'm afraid this is not going to work out (he crumples her resume into a ball) Thanks for coming in.

Well, it CAN be an impediment to productivity in the office. When running a team of contractors at a fed agency I once hired a girl (on the basis of a telphone interview ironically enough) so incandescantly hot, she even made me a little weak in the knees to look at her. At the end of the first week I actually had to have a sit-down with the Center Director (gov side) to tell him that he needed to put a leash on half of his senior staff, as my employee was being pestered by very senior GS-14& 15 Kawyers and managers who kept stopping by her desk to offer to "show her around", "Train" her (my job), or just "make sure she had all the supplies she needed" (a gs-15 who didn't even know where the supply closet WAS mind you).

The day she came in dressed to go out clubbing later that night, I thanked all the gods that I'd actually worked as an Employment Dicrimination/Sexual Harrasmen lawyer on the Plaintiff's side for a summer, so I knew pretty much EXACTLY what I could and could not legally say, as I tried to make her aware that while we had no dress code, a corset top and short skirt wasn't giving her the professional image she needed to maintain (and was causing physical pain to some of the horndogs in the office-but I didn't say that part)

We walked in, sat down, Obie came in with the twenty seven eight-by-tenColour glossy pictures with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the backOf each one, sat down. Man came in said, "All rise." We all stood up,And Obie stood up with the twenty seven eight-by-ten colour glossyPictures, and the judge walked in sat down with a seeing eye dog, and heSat down, we sat down. Obie looked at the seeing eye dog, and then at theTwenty seven eight-by-ten colour glossy pictures with circles and arrowsAnd a paragraph on the back of each one, and looked at the seeing eye dog.And then at twenty seven eight-by-ten colour glossy pictures with circlesAnd arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one and began to cry,'cause Obie came to the realization that it was a typical case of AmericanBlind justice

Once had a lawyer for a client who fired his secretary because "God told him to". He was bat shiat crazy and as dumb as a bag of hammers. Funny thing was: she was the one who knew all his network info, email passwords etc. When he fired her it took him months to get things sorted out.

exick:It may be shiatty, but I don't think attractiveness is a protected class. You can be fired/not hired for being an uggo too.

You can be fired for being too short, too tall, too fat, too skinny, having the wrong color hair, having a name ending in A, looking at the boss funny, or pretty much any damned thing except your race, Your sex, refusing to sleep with the boss, your religion, your ethnic origin, your age (if you are over 40) or a disability you might have (or a disability your employer might PERCIEVE you have even if you don't)

an Overall of the employment discrimination laws in this country is long overdue

Now, I didn;t follow this case but I would be amazed if her lawyer didn;t argue that this was tantmount to gender-based discrimination as it is extremely unlikely this guy would have fired a MALE assistant for being so attractive he was tempted to sleep with him. Therefore, at worst this is a policy with a "disparate impact" even under a strict Yick Woo level defintion as 100% of those affected by the policy would be female. Not sure why/if that argument would be rejected in this case

stuffy:As a man I find this verdict insulting. Its like saying we are all walking penises with no impulse control. Whats next Iowa, letting rapist go because the woman was dressed too sexy?

From everything I've seen/heard/read. Conservatives would be happy if that was the rule of the land.Because it can't be a mans fault. He is pure and innocent, it's those evil, sexy, women. With their eyes and legs and boobs and.....

Lexx:Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: jayhawk88: Drew P Balls: Thank goodness for right to work legislation. I think it may have saved that dentist's marriage.

And what a marriage it is too!

"Honey, I wanted to have an affair with an attractive woman.""WHAT???""But it's OK! I fired her!""Oh, well, OK then. Because I know for a fact that the only way you would ever meet another attractive woman is if she worked for you."

They must be fundies. This sounds like a "remove the temptation" thing that would sound completely reasonable and logical to people like that.

If I remember the earlier story correctly, Boss Hog kept sending explicit texts to the employee and his wife found out and - after meeting with his pastor - decided to fire her because they couldn't legally dress her in a burka.

Magorn:Well, it CAN be an impediment to productivity in the office. When running a team of contractors at a fed agency I once hired a girl (on the basis of a telphone interview ironically enough) so incandescantly hot, she even made me a little weak in the knees to look at her. At the end of the first week I actually had to have a sit-down with the Center Director (gov side) to tell him that he needed to put a leash on half of his senior staff, as my employee was being pestered by very senior GS-14& 15 Kawyers and managers who kept stopping by her desk to offer to "show her around", "Train" her (my job), or just "make sure she had all the supplies she needed" (a gs-15 who didn't even know where the supply closet WAS mind you).

The day she came in dressed to go out clubbing later that night, I thanked all the gods that I'd actually worked as an Employment Dicrimination/Sexual Harrasmen lawyer on the Plaintiff's side for a summer, so I knew pretty much EXACTLY what I could and could not legally say, as I tried to make her aware that while we had no dress code, a corset top and short skirt wasn't giving her the professional image she needed to maintain (and was causing physical pain to some of the horndogs in the office-but I didn't say that part)

You're totally doing it wrong. The first few days you're around her, you need to put out a strong "in the closet but HR and supervisors don't know" vibe. Use the "Name that color" Javascript app so that you can say things like "that's a nice shade of Apricot on your nail polish", or "Hawaiian tan shoes don't really go with those slacks".

Within 2 weeks, you can be staring at her cleavage from 8 inches away and she'll think you're displeased with the fabric of her top...

redmid17:tortilla burger: She had warned the opinion could allow bosses to legally fire ... small-breasted workers in favor of big-breasted workers.

If I recall correctly, I believe you're allowed to discriminate against ugly/attractive people during the hiring process...even without the "my wife made me do it" defense. It would be odd to have mismatching rulings on hiring and firing employees based the same criterion.

That being said, it seems like nowadays you can be fired for any made-up reason, the employer just has to choose a politically correct made-up reason. Not that it really matters, when it comes down to it.

In a right to work employment at will state you can be fired for any reason that doesn't discriminate against a protected class?

I should be in the kitchen:Of course, it's always the harlot's fault for causing her brothers in Christ to stumble. I bet she even wore clothes that exposed her ankles, causing him to sin by having impure thoughts.

/been reading a lot lately on patriarchal Christianity and the purity/modesty culture. It's disgusting how they put blame solely on women for men's actions.

I like how it's assumed she would allow him to ravage her if he wanted to

"She smells like bananas, and I hate bananas", "He looked at me funny", and "those fingernails are an odd shade of green" are also not valid causes for discrimination suits. If you don't like the store's policies, don't work there, don't shop there, and feel free to peacefully picket with signs of "Asshole in charge here" - he certainly seems to fit the bill.

However, we really really don't want the government telling us who we can hire/fire. "Attractive" is not a protected class.

Where do you folks find the seemingly endless fount of outrage to spend on these cases?

ZeroPly:Magorn: Well, it CAN be an impediment to productivity in the office. When running a team of contractors at a fed agency I once hired a girl (on the basis of a telphone interview ironically enough) so incandescantly hot, she even made me a little weak in the knees to look at her. At the end of the first week I actually had to have a sit-down with the Center Director (gov side) to tell him that he needed to put a leash on half of his senior staff, as my employee was being pestered by very senior GS-14& 15 Kawyers and managers who kept stopping by her desk to offer to "show her around", "Train" her (my job), or just "make sure she had all the supplies she needed" (a gs-15 who didn't even know where the supply closet WAS mind you).

The day she came in dressed to go out clubbing later that night, I thanked all the gods that I'd actually worked as an Employment Dicrimination/Sexual Harrasmen lawyer on the Plaintiff's side for a summer, so I knew pretty much EXACTLY what I could and could not legally say, as I tried to make her aware that while we had no dress code, a corset top and short skirt wasn't giving her the professional image she needed to maintain (and was causing physical pain to some of the horndogs in the office-but I didn't say that part)

You're totally doing it wrong. The first few days you're around her, you need to put out a strong "in the closet but HR and supervisors don't know" vibe. Use the "Name that color" Javascript app so that you can say things like "that's a nice shade of Apricot on your nail polish", or "Hawaiian tan shoes don't really go with those slacks".

Within 2 weeks, you can be staring at her cleavage from 8 inches away and she'll think you're displeased with the fabric of her top...

Belias:"She smells like bananas, and I hate bananas", "He looked at me funny", and "those fingernails are an odd shade of green" are also not valid causes for discrimination suits. If you don't like the store's policies, don't work there, don't shop there, and feel free to peacefully picket with signs of "Asshole in charge here" - he certainly seems to fit the bill.

However, we really really don't want the government telling us who we can hire/fire. "Attractive" is not a protected class.

Where do you folks find the seemingly endless fount of outrage to spend on these cases?

Um, we find it in our inherent sense of dignity and empathy for our fellow citizens, regardless of race, creed, or hotness?

Belias:"She smells like bananas, and I hate bananas", "He looked at me funny", and "those fingernails are an odd shade of green" are also not valid causes for discrimination suits. If you don't like the store's policies, don't work there, don't shop there, and feel free to peacefully picket with signs of "Asshole in charge here" - he certainly seems to fit the bill.

However, we really really don't want the government telling us who we can hire/fire. "Attractive" is not a protected class.

Where do you folks find the seemingly endless fount of outrage to spend on these cases?

The same attitude that men can't control themselves (and it is the woman's fault), when carried to the extreme, has produced the burqa.

sdd2000:redmid17: tortilla burger: She had warned the opinion could allow bosses to legally fire ... small-breasted workers in favor of big-breasted workers.

If I recall correctly, I believe you're allowed to discriminate against ugly/attractive people during the hiring process...even without the "my wife made me do it" defense. It would be odd to have mismatching rulings on hiring and firing employees based the same criterion.

That being said, it seems like nowadays you can be fired for any made-up reason, the employer just has to choose a politically correct made-up reason. Not that it really matters, when it comes down to it.

In a right to work employment at will state you can be fired for any reason that doesn't discriminate against a protected class?

Ozone_Ranger:Guys should be insulted that this guy has made a precedent that men have no impulse control and it is a woman's fault that they can't control themselves

No. This is one stupid guy. Only a drooling moran would take his actions to be indicative of "[all] men".- if a particular man murders somebody, does that mean that men are killers?- if a particular man cheats on his taxes, does that mean that men are dishonest?

tortilla burger:She had warned the opinion could allow bosses to legally fire ... small-breasted workers in favor of big-breasted workers.

If I recall correctly, I believe you're allowed to discriminate against ugly/attractive people during the hiring process...even without the "my wife made me do it" defense. It would be odd to have mismatching rulings on hiring and firing employees based the same criterion.

That being said, it seems like nowadays you can be fired for any made-up reason, the employer just has to choose a politically correct made-up reason. Not that it really matters, when it comes down to it.

Complaining about political correctiveness = white man's victim card.

Because the case in the article had noting to do with being political correct, you just wanted an excuse to play the victim card.

It's sad really. She didn't do anything wrong, yet gets fired cause her boss is a horn dog who can't stop thinking about banging her. Sounds more like he wanted to fark her, and she was not willing. And what is even sadder, is court found against her, but now that the PUBLIC is angry at a clear violation of her rights as an employee, they are reconsidering. WTF. Do the right thing in the first place, make that asshole pay for lost wages, mental anguish, and whatever else you can think of. She worked for you for 10 years, just because you wanna bang her and she doesn't want you is no cause for termination.

Latinwolf:tortilla burger: She had warned the opinion could allow bosses to legally fire ... small-breasted workers in favor of big-breasted workers.

If I recall correctly, I believe you're allowed to discriminate against ugly/attractive people during the hiring process...even without the "my wife made me do it" defense. It would be odd to have mismatching rulings on hiring and firing employees based the same criterion.

That being said, it seems like nowadays you can be fired for any made-up reason, the employer just has to choose a politically correct made-up reason. Not that it really matters, when it comes down to it.

Complaining about political correctiveness = white man's victim card.

Because the case in the article had noting to do with being political correct, you just wanted an excuse to play the victim card.

stuffy:As a man I find this verdict insulting. Its like saying we are all walking penises with no impulse control. Whats next Iowa, letting rapist go because the woman was dressed too sexy?

/sounds like islamist countries where the women can be stoned to death for showing an ankle, because apparently, showing any skin of any kind there turns the men into slobbering rapists, and its all the womans fault. Same douchbaggery, different country.

MikeBoomshadow:Lexx: stuffy: As a man I find this verdict insulting. Its like saying we are all walking penises with no impulse control. Whats next Iowa, letting rapist go because the woman was dressed too sexy?